The extraordinarily difficult nature of legal interpreting.

Trust me,
legal interpreting is not for the faint of heart. There are daunting encounters
for professional court interpreters. First, they must be experts in their
language pair(s). Second, they must have accurate knowledge of current legal terminology. Third, they must
always maintain neutrality and professionalism. However, one of the greatest obstacles
legal interpreters face is practicing in a combative environment.

The
interpreter finds himself in the middle of a war between the defense attorney
and the prosecutor. Both sides grasp
diligently onto anything they can find that could help move their case forward.
Why is this such a big problem for legal interpreters?

Legal interpreting is subjective

In the English language, there are many synonyms that describe
the same thing. You could have three different interpreters, and each one may select
a different word with the same meaning. Just like southerners, westerners, and
northerners each have their own expressions, interpreters from diverse
backgrounds also use diverse but correct expressions of their choosing.

Legal interpreters have a very challenging craft because they
must render the source language information into the target language accurately
and instantaneously, without the benefit of researching every word. They investigate information beforehand. They
reformulate the message using their best skills and electing the best rendition
in that moment. As an interpreter myself, I often listen to other interpreters
and contrast how I would have conveyed the message. It is easy to listen and,
at that moment, think of a better word. I often remind myself that although he
might have opted for a different word, the message was indeed accurate.

In the aggressive court arena, the professional interpreter
must have thick skin and expect not only bilingual but also monolingual attorneys
to question the use of specific words. Remember, they are looking for any
argument that can help their case. Although the interpreter is a neutral
officer of the court, he is often treated by both sides as the suspicious,
untrusted enemy. And yet, impartiality is a primary rule of professional court
interpreter conduct. Professional interpreters
must be prepared to stand by their rendition when correct and gracious enough
to petition the Court to amend a rendition. It is never easy to navigate communication
between opposing sides!

Legal interpreters convey the message

Many attorneys have the erroneous idea that interpreters are
supposed to reformulate the entire message verbatim. Not only is verbatim not
how foreign languages are structured, but also not how interpreters practice.
Every language has its own grammar, syntax and semantics. Also, words and
expressions are often dissimilarly constructed from one language to another. Interpreters
must convey the message, not the specific words.

It is common to hear attorneys complain that the interpreter
isn’t asking the question word for word. Attorneys with very limited
understanding of other languages might hear a false cognate and conclude that
the interpreter is inaccurate. For instance, in Spanish, he might here the word
intoxicado and
believe that he is saying intoxicated or drunk. The accurate meaning in Spanish
for intoxicado relates to food
poisoning.

Once again, it is the nature of opposing attorneys to get caught
up in tiny little word differences and argue every little thing they can find. Undaunted,
the professional interpreter must maintain professionalism and defend word
choices while maintaining composure during this belligerent process.

As you can see, the nature of interpreting in a legal setting
can be arduous. There are things that can help.

Certification

Certified
court interpreters have been trained and demonstrated the minimum standard of proficiency
by passing an oral examination (just as lawyers who pass the bar possess
minimum standards of proficiency to practice law). They are uniquely prepared
to work in the court environment. Untrained
paraprofessionals and interpreters who don’t possess minimum standards of
proficiency, although perhaps skilled, are often flustered when they feel
attacked by an attorney in court. They usually find themselves ill-prepared to
justify their decisions before the court; the frustration can negatively affect
performance (which may already be dubious at best).

Bench and
Bar Education

Many of the problems mentioned are a result of others in the
court not fully understanding how interpreting is supposed to be done. Proper
training can help judges and attorneys recognize certified and qualified (those
professionals for whom certification is not
yet available in their language) interpreters doing their job correctly and call
out the fakers and hackers.

Post navigation

Hi Alfonso, great article highlighing the challenges of a court interpreter. <> does not exclusively refer to food poisoning – it is poisoning (general if no specific context conveyed) or nauseated in some less formal contexts.